THE IRAQI SPECIAL TRIBUNAL {IST} IS INCAPABLE OF CONDUCTING A FAIR TRIAL

Ø The prosecution of deposed Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was supposed to bring justice and transparency to a country where those were in short supply. Instead, the proceedings are dissolving into a mockery of those values. Since the mass-killing trials - there have been two - began nearly a year ago, the drama in and around the courtroom has been alternately tragic, absurd, mystifying and just plain untoward. Three of Hussein's defence team have been assassinated. One judge was recently removed from the trial because he overtly sympathized with Hussein, proclaiming the former Iraqi strongman was not a dictator. Defence lawyers then boycotted the proceedings. Other presiding judges seemed to have a tenuous grasp of the rules of law and courtroom decorum. It's a sad turn of events that a prosecution that was designed to show that even murderous dictators can be brought to justice has been such a mad circus. Iraq sorely needs to gain faith in justice and public institutions, but the conduct of the trial has turned such a promise on its ear.

Hussein Trial stretches Justice, Denver Post, October 7, 2006, available at http://origin.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_4413589

* * *

Ø "It is just impossible to have a public trial if you can't guarantee the safety of witnesses, judges or defence counsel," said Richard Goldstone, a South African judge who led the prosecution of former Yugoslav leaders at the international criminal tribunal at The Hague. Hussein's trial should be moved abroad, Goldstone told The Associated Press.

James Rupert, Second Saddam Trial Lawyer Killed, Newsday.com, November 9, 2005, available at http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-woiraq094505015nov09,0,4004731.story?coll=ny-worldnews-toputility

* * *

Ø Former US ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues, David Scheffer, criticized the court for not responding to defense arguments about the court’s legitimacy, an act he characterized as “bizarre.” “There are very, very serious issues that still have to be resolved before one can say this trial is on track as a fair trial.”

Tad Walch, CNN analyst notes missteps in Saddam trial, Deseret Morning News, February 24, 2006 available at www.deseretnews.com/dn/print/1,1442,635187095,00

* * *

Ø Professor Richard Overy of King’s College London, a leading authority on Nuremburg Trial and International Law accurately described the way the international legal system works. He writes: "International law works only against weaker states. Big powers have an unmerited, but unassailable, [self-induced] immunity". "What had happened in Iraq was a major crime against humanity, and Bush and Blair could be in the dock," and the principles of international legal system should apply in trying them. Justice is not achieved by a show trial; it is achieved by a fair trial.

Ghali Hassan, The Farce Trial of Saddam, December 27, 2005, available at www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=1641

* * *

Ø The way the trial has been organized, however, has divided international justice experts. Some of them say Mr. Hussein should have been brought before an international tribunal, such as the panels that judged Nazi leaders at Nuremburg, or the Rwandan Hutu officials charged with genocide, rather than a domestic Iraqi court. "Since some of the crimes he is accused of are crimes under international law," such as crimes against humanity and genocide, says Geoffrey Robertson, a British lawyer, "it would be better for a proper international court to be set up."

Peter Ford, Can Saddam Hussein Get a Fair Trial? Christian Science Monitor, October 19, 2005 available at http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1019/p01s02-woiq.html

* * *

Ø "Nobody in Iraq has handled a case like this before and it could be ruined by poor presentation by the prosecution and procedural errors, which is why international expertise could be called in, even for the judges." Bhuta views the Anfal trial with scepticism after the Dujail trial, which was much smaller in scope.

Ø "For a trial of such magnitude, there must be pre-trial hearings to see whether each side is ready for the actual one. But we understand the court is pressing ahead from Monday into the trial straight away," he said.

Ø "This is paving the way for ad-hoc adjournments where no one is satisfied. The court has not learnt the lesson and that is a recipe for disaster."

Analysts fear Saddam trial collapse, AFP, August 18, 2006 available at http://iafrica.com/news/features/939227.htm

Ø The Iraqi High Court trying Saddam Hussein and other former Iraqi officials is spinning out of control. Defendants have been physically removed by the court for abusive and disruptive behaviour. Saddam Hussein has walked out. Defense counsel has staged a boycott of the trial and has since been barred from court. Two defence attorneys and one investigative judge have been assassinated. The chief judge recently quit, in part out of frustration over government interference. The new chief presiding judge is a controversial figure, known for fairness and efficiency but accused of bias because of run-ins with Saddam's regime. Without question, these proceedings have become chaotic. The graver danger, however, is that the court is losing credibility, and that support for domestic war crimes tribunals is being weakened.

Ø A key condition of international law is that the domestic legal system has the capacity to undertake trials according to international standards of fairness and impartiality. The Iraqi High Court, which has poorly communicated what are already equivocal procedural rules, is failing in this responsibility.

Mark Elis, Can Saddam’s Trial Be Salvaged?, International Herald Tribune, February 10, 2006 available at http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/09/opinion/edellis.php

* * *

One legal expert wondered afterward whether Saddam's court appearance was meant merely as a show of strength by the interim regime, handed limited sovereignty just three days earlier by U.S. occupation authorities. "A cynic might say the only reason it happened yesterday was really related to the handover, as opposed to proper timing for the legal proceedings," said Hanny Megally, Middle East specialist at New York's International Center for Transitional Justice.

Ø Juan Cole, an Arab-American expert in Mideast law, said he would like to see Saddam punished as an example for other dictators - but only after a sound legal proceeding. He said the U.S. invasion and overthrow of the Baathists were not sanctioned under international law, and so "one cannot say that this (interim Iraqi) government or this court represent in any way Iraqi sovereignty."

Uncertainties mark Saddam’s trial, AP, July 3, 2004 available at www.duckdaotsu.org/070304-hussein_trial.html

* * *

Ø It is very clear that the trial will not be moved out of Iraq, but Iraqi authorities must ensure that there are international advisors to all sides in this trial," veteran Iraq expert and analyst Joost Hiltermann told AFP from Washington.

Analysts fear Saddam trial collapse, AFP, August 18, 2006 available at http://iafrica.com/news/features/939227.htm

* * *

THE IST IS NOT INDEPENDENT FROM POLITICAL INTERFERENCE

While an anonymous Iraqi judge nominally conducted the affair, US officials were clearly in control. There was a small and carefully vetted audience. No American military uniforms were present but, as the New York Times explained: “[O]fficials of the new Iraqi government were seated with three American reporters and three American officials: two lawyers advising the Iraqi judge, and a United States Navy admiral acting as a spokesman who attended in tan chinos and a yellow, short-sleeved sports shirt.”

Saddam Hussein in court: a show trial made in the USA, Peter Symonds, 5 July 2004, available at http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/jul2004/huss-j05.shtml

* * *

Ø The American government has tried to portray itself as working in a purely advisory capacity, but has been at the forefront of several crucial elements of the trial. For one thing, it has provided $138 million to build, over the course of a year, the state-of-the-art courthouse that sits at the heart of the fortified Green Zone, which also contains the American embassy and the headquarters of the Iraqi government. Members of the Regime Crimes Liaison Office, attached to the embassy, have thoroughly aided the investigatory process, including overseeing excavations of mass graves.

Saddam Hussein Goes on Trial for Crimes Against Humanity, New York Times, 19 October, 2005.

* * *

Ø American lawyers and law enforcement agents have been dispatched to sift through the evidence against Mr. Hussein, dig up mass graves for forensic proof of his crimes and develop the prosecution strategy. Americans guiding the process say they are taking pains to preserve independence and credibility. American expertise is needed now to rebuild a judiciary eroded under Mr. Hussein's rule. But with time and training, they say, Iraqis will be in full control. "The tribunal, the statute, can be seen as a microcosm of the larger undertaking," said Richard Dicker, head of transitional justice for Human Rights Watch, the New York-based rights group. "It's an occupation-supported effort with Iraqi judges and lawyers." The Federal Bureau of Investigation is leading the investigation, along with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and agents from the Justice Department.

Ø The American military is guarding Mr. Hussein, even as he is transferred to the legal custody of the Iraqis. Washington is financing the court.

Somini Sengupta and John F. Burns, Hussein’s Trial Offers both Peril and Promise to Iraq and US, New York Times, 30 June, 2004

* * *

Ø American forensic team, including more than a dozen archaeologists, anthropologists, and technicians, is midway through the grisly process of transforming this mass grave into courtroom evidence against Hussein and his henchmen that meets the strictest international legal standards. This is the first of 10 sites that Kehoe plans to excavate… Kehoe's team set up shop here on Sept. 1, and only this week finished exhuming about 200 bodies from the two trenches. A laboratory team will spend another two months cataloguing and analyzing the remains… For the last six weeks, a forensic team several dozen strong, including anthropologists and archaeologists, has been reconstructing in excruciating detail the mass murder that took place on the outskirts of Hatra…In a long morgue tent at FOB Jaguar, P. Willey, an anthropology professor on leave from California State University, Chico, supervised the analysis of the remains. Willey said his team doesn't have to examine every body in the grave, just a representative sample. So his morgue is processing the remains of only 125 bodies from the trench full of women and children. The Regime Crimes Liaison Office, which Kehoe heads, got $75 million for two years of work.

Thanassis Cambanis, Boston Globe, October 13, 2004

* * *

Ø At an estimated cost of $75 million, the U.S. government is financing and overseeing the tribunal investigations, sifting through mounds of documents, training the prosecutors, investigators and judges. For many Iraqis and other Arabs, any trial of Saddam inevitably will be seen as an American production.

Uncertainties mark Saddam Hussein trial, Charles Hanley, AP, 3 July, 2004 available at http://www.duckdaotsu.org/070304-hussein_trial.html

* * *

Ø The head of the U.S. Regime Crimes Liaison Office, Greg Kehoe, has had contact with the U.S. intelligence officials who control most of the Baathist archives, now stored in Qatar.

Saddam Hussein’s Trial, Washington Post, July 2, 2004

* * *

Ø Ridha Jawad Taki, a senior official in the country's biggest Shiite party, believes that “the court should be more active. Saddam was captured two years ago. ... The weakness of this court might affect the verdicts, and this is worrying us."

Hamza Hendawi, Saddam Lashes out at U.S. as Trial Resumes, AP, Nov. 28, 2005

* * *

Ø Ridha Jwad Taqi, head of the political office of SCIRI, another Shi'ite party in the government declared: "The Americans have attempted to Americanize the court so it appeals to their public, but it has to be run in an Iraqi way," he said. "We can't continue this way, we have to find a solution quickly ... The people who suffered so much under Saddam are severely disappointed with this court." (ID)

Luke Baker, Doubts and questions deepen as Saddam trial to resume, Reuter, Sun Dec 4, 2005.

* * *

Ø Ali Dabagh, a Shi'ite member of the Transitional National Assembly declared: ''The judge is giving too much leeway to Saddam. He should respect the Iraqis and the victims' feelings."

Thanassis Cambanis, Flash of old Hussein Sets off Ripples, Boston Globe, Nov. 29, 2005

* * *

Ø Members of Iraq’s executive and legislative branches are exerting pressure on the Iraqi High Criminal Court. Shiite legislator Ali al-Adeeb, a senior official in Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari's party, declared: “"The chief judge should be changed and replaced by someone who is strict and courageous." (Goes to “objective standard” of the court’s impartiality as a whole in the eyes of a reasonable man)

Hamza Hendawi, Saddam Lashes out at U.S. as Trial Resumes, AP, 28 Nov., 2005

* * *

Ø A source close to Kurdish judge Rizgar Amin himself told Reuters that tribunal officials were trying to talk him out of his decision but he was reluctant to stay on because Shi'ite leaders had criticized him for being "soft" on Saddam in court. "He tendered his resignation to the court a few days ago but the court rejected it. Now talks are under way to convince him to go back on his decision," he said on Saturday. “He's under a lot of pressure. The whole court is under political pressure.”

Ahmed Rasheed, Govt tries to persuade Saddam judge not to quit, Reuter, Jan. 15^th, 2006

Ø “This evil man has to face the death penalty. The international tribunal in the Hague cannot order the death penalty.”

Senator Joe Lieberman, NBC TV, 14 Dec 2003

* * *

Ø In New York, Human Rights Watch said it was concerned about al-Amiri's removal. "This appears to be improper interference in the independence of the tribunal, and may greatly damage the court," the group said in a statement signed by Richard Dicker, director of its International Justice Program. Similar criticism was raised in Saddam's other trial for the deaths of Shiite Muslims in the town of Dujail following an assassination attempt on his presidential motorcade.

Sameer Yacoub and Jamal Halaby, New Judge Tosses Saddam from Courtroom, AP, October 3, 2006 available at http://ap.washingtontimes.com/dynamic/stories/S/SADDAM_TRIAL?SITE=DCTMS&SECTION=HOME

* * *

Ø “‘Calling for a separation of the judiciary and legislative branches of the government, Salem Chalabi declared: ‘It is a separate judiciary, but in practice it is not clear and does not stand up to the politicians’”

Anupama Narayanswamy, Ex-Official Fears Bill Will Weaken Saddam Tribunal, Washington Times, October 11, 2005 available at www.washingtontimes.com/world/20051010-103118-6130r

* * *

Ø "There is strong evidence of genocide against the former regime, but based on our observations from the Dujail massacre trial, we believe the court is ill-equipped to conduct a trial of such a magnitude against a head of a state," Nehal Bhuta of the New York-based watchdog Human Rights Watch told AFP. "We saw in the Dujail trial a lot of political pressure to speed it up and reach the verdict as soon as possible even as the court suffered from dozens of procedural flaws," Bhuta said.

Analysts fear Saddam trial collapse, AFP, August 18, 2006 available at http://iafrica.com/news/features/939227.htm

* * *

Ø At first, the Bush administration appointed Salem Chalabi to try Saddam Hussein. Salem Chalabi is the nephew of former CIA man Ahmed Chalabi and the lead lawyer for a number of international companies doing business in Iraq. The Bush administration only removed him from the case after his uncle lost favour with Washington over ties to Iran.

Aaron Glantz, Justice for Saddam and his Victims, antiwar.com, June 16, 2005 available at http://www.antiwar.com/glantz/?articleid=6314

* * *

Ø Manipulating the trial's timing is the real story. Why suddenly this week? A fortnight ago, at Chatham House in London, Iraq's president, Jalal Talabani, said he did not know when the trial would take place. Within days a date was fixed, conveniently diverting reporters' attention from the referendum count. With the issue out of the spotlight, it is a fair bet that when the official result is declared - perhaps today - the announcement that the constitution has passed will be treated as pretty dull since we already "know" that from the weekend leaks by Condoleezza Rice, Jack Straw and the Iraqi government.

Jonathan Steele, Saddam's trial is merely a political sideshow, Guardian Unlimited, October 21, 2005 available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1597318,00.html

* * *

THE IST IS NOT AN IMPARTIAL INSTITUTION

Ø Iraqi Interim Prime Minister, Ibrahim Al-Jafari, in reference to the death penalty, added: “That's not a problem, many people already volunteered. Many people would love to do the job. This is a man who does not deserve any mercy."

Adam Nichols, Saddam Executioners Lining Up, New York Daily News, Oct. 16, 2005

* * *

Ø Laith Kubba, the government's chief spokesman, surmised: “Iraqis cannot understand how Saddam has been held for nearly two years without trial, there's plenty, plenty of evidence. What's the hold-up? People find it unacceptable,” adding, “Saddam's mere presence is fuelling the insurgency…. The head of this thing must be crushed.”

Richard Boudraux, More Than Hussein on Trial, Los Angeles Times, Oct. 14, 2005.

* * *

Ø Feisal al-Istrabadi, vice president of the U.S.-based Iraqi Forum for Democracy, member of the Planning Committee for the U.S. State Department's Future of Iraq Project, and a principal drafter of the transitional administrative law, declared that "these were not hidden crimes, they were in open, under the principles of command responsibility, whether you have a document signed by Saddam or not, under the principles of command, the crimes were so ubiquitous, that I think it would be virtually impossible for Saddam to argue that he did not know.”

CNN, July 1, 2004

* * *

Ø The absence of independence and impartiality was compounded by a declaration of one the judges on condition of anonymity: "The trial of Saddam Hussein will be brief and immediately afterwards the former dictator will be hanged by a rope in one of the rooms of the Mukhabarat (Saddam's secret service) where thousands of Iraqis have been tortured and killed. All efforts by foreign countries to prevent the death by hanging of the former dictator are useless, as the sentence has already been issued by the Iraqi people."

Judge says Saddam sentence already decided, World Peace Herald, Sept. 15, 2005

* * *

Ø “Personally, I don’t like the makeup of this tribunal because I don’t think it can be objective”, said retired judge Juan Guzman Tapia. “Nobody who suffered because of Saddam’s orders or who is convinced already of his guilt should be studying the evidence in his trial.”

David R. Sands, Pinochet Judge Doubts Fair Trial for Saddam, Washington Times, October 20, 2005

Available at: www.washingtontimes.com/world/20051019-095906-7349

* * *

Ø The controversy has thrown a cloud over the handling of the trial, with defence lawyers and international rights bodies calling for it to be held abroad, and claiming that the trial risks being seen as unfair if it continues in Baghdad.

James Hider, Saddam’s new judge is a native of massacred Kurd town, Times online, January 24, 2006 available at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-2006535,00.html

* * *

Ø "The trial is clearly verging on dysfunction at this point," says David Scheffer, the US Ambassador at large for War Crimes Issues during President Clinton's administration. "The new judge has allowed himself to become emotionally engaged in a way that does not facilitate a disciplined and respectful process in the courtroom," he says.

Charles Levinson, Hussein trial: new judge, new concerns, Christian Science Monitor, February 2, 2006 available at http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0202/p07s02-woiq.html?s=widep

* * *

Ø David Crane, who was Chief Prosecutor at the Special Court for Sierra Leone, wrote:

“I have a concern about an appearance of bias on the part of the new Chief Judge, currently presiding over this stage of the trial of Saddam. An Iraqi Kurd, who lived in a village destroyed by Saddam, a defendant, can give the appearance of just such a bias. This may bring a result that may appear to be unfair to this fledgling democracy. I am surprised that there has not been a stronger move to have the Chief Judge recused.”

Helena Cobban, For Saddam Trial Aficionados, Just World News, February 16, 2006 available at http://justworldnews.org/archives/001742.html

* * *

THE IST VIOLATES INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS STANDARDS

Ø In video of a legal proceeding that aired Thursday, Saddam Hussein ridiculed Iraq's new government and decried his lack of access to counsel in the war crimes cases against him. In the footage, the former Iraqi dictator asked for his attorney and criticized his inability to see the lawyer before trial. "By law, a lawyer should be with the defendant," Saddam said. "Is it fair that the lawyer cannot see the defendant except in court sessions?" In video, Saddam slams Iraqi proceeding, Ex-dictator decries lack of legal aid, says panel under U.S. thumb, July 21, 2005. In video of a legal proceeding that aired Thursday, Saddam Hussein ridiculed Iraq's new government and decried his lack of access to counsel in the war crimes cases against him. In the footage, the former Iraqi dictator asked for his attorney and criticized his inability to see the lawyer before trial. "By law, a lawyer should be with the defendant," Saddam said. "Is it fair that the lawyer cannot see the defendant except in court sessions?" In video, Saddam slams Iraqi proceeding, Ex-dictator decries lack of legal aid, says panel under U.S. thumb.

Lawyers seek court’s help to get access to Saddam, CNN, 21 July, 2005

Ø There is an old saying in the legal profession that everybody deserves a fair trial. But that is easier said than done when it comes to the former Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein. After being captured over a year ago by American forces, Saddam has been held in a military detention center without charges being filed and without access to legal counsel even though his family has hired over 20 lawyers, including several Americans.

Saddam Denied Basic Right to Fair Trial, 20 Lawyers Can’t Get Former Iraqi President A Honest Day in Court, Greg Szymanski, American Free Press, 6 March, 2005 available at www.americanfreepress.net/html/saddam_denied.html

* * *

Ø “The draft constitution also indicates that "the right of defence is guaranteed". What this usually means is that a defendant should have the right to a lawyer at all times and that this right should not be limited in any way. Not so in Iraq, where the defendants of this special tribunal did not have the benefit of legal representation or access to their lawyers for more than a year. The defendants have not been able to communicate with anyone freely, let alone with their lawyers.

Zaid Al-Ali, Rights ridiculed, Al-Ahram Weekly, 18-24 Aug. 2005

* * *

Ø Lawyers for former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein have said he has asked to meet a former US attorney general who is a member of his defence team, but he is yet to hear from the authorities. A statement on Monday issued by the team, which goes by the acronym ISNAD, said Saddam asked the special tribunal set up to try him, for a meeting with former US attorney general Ramsey Clark, but his request had not been answered yet.

Ahmed Janabi, Saddam asks to meet ex-US official, Al-Jazeera, 25 July, 2005

* * *

Ø Few of the top regime officials have been able to meet with lawyers. Defence attorneys have complained about not having access to their clients, saying that any proceedings held under those conditions would be seen as political show trials.

Saddam, defence lawyer meet for 1st time, USA Today, 16 December, 2004

* * *

Ø Also the guards who escorted Saddam to the courtroom took his pen and personal documents without even asking for his permission. “Why did they take my pen and the papers that I need here in the court? How can I defend myself?” he asked.

A fair trial for Saddam Hussein?, Al-Jazeera, 29 November, 2005

* * *

Ø Mr. Hussein is being denied several fundamental requirements of due process, and he is being tried in a court lacking legitimacy. There is an inappropriate standard of proof to convict, and there is inadequate protection against self-incrimination. There is also inadequate protection of the right to mount a vigorous defence. The defendant has no ability to call and compel witnesses to testify. It also unclear whether the defendant has the right to examine witnesses called against him, a fundamental due process right.

Joshua Karstendick, Saddam's trial littered with due process, fairness concerns, The Triangle Online, October 28, 2005 available at http://www.thetriangle.org/media/storage/paper689/news/2005/10/28/EdOp/Saddams.Trial.Littered.With.Due.Process.Fairness.Concerns-1037315.shtml?norewrite200609201502&sourcedomain=www.thetriangle.org

* * *

Ø Richard Dicker, international law director for Human Rights Watch, says that his organization will not send observers or expert advisers to help the Iraqi judges because of “serious human rights shortcomings in the structure of the trial.” Among his objections: Saddam wasn’t given an attorney until after the investigative judge had begun collecting evidence, undercutting his ability to challenge questionable witnesses.

Richard Willing & Steven Komarow, Questions Mount as Saddam’s Trial Opens, USA Today, October 18, 2005 available at www.uastoday.com/news/world/2005-10-18-saddam-trial-cover_x.htm/csp=N009

* * *

Ø “Denial of access to legal counsel is not the only but perhaps the most glaring violation of due process that makes this week’s trial opening a salutary joke. Given how brazen and obvious the denials of due process are in Mr. Hussein’s case, one would almost conclude that the US cares nothing about the legitimacy of the IST, or the credibility of the Iraqi government which is tied to it.”

Ian Douglas, Who will have the courage to stand up? Al-Ahram Weekly, 20 - 26 October 2005

Available at: www.weekly.ahram.org.eg/2005/767/re5.htm

* * *

Ø The court, the training and the whole proceedings cost US$75 million - courtesy of US taxpayers (the budget was allocated in May 2004). About 300 people - paid by the Americans - work on the trial machinery. The five "secret" Iraqi judges - Shiites and Kurds, no Sunnis - are paid by the Americans, live inside the Green Zone and are protected by the Americans from being kidnapped or killed. They have received special training from US, British and Australian legal experts and have even staged a mock trial in London. They are supposed to be "independent" in a country on which "the United States continues to wield vast influence", according to the understated Associated Press. Human Rights Watch has warned on the record that the trial may be "violating international standards for fair trials".

Pepe Escobar, The Occupiers’ Trial, Asia Times, October 19, 2005 available at www.atimes.com/atimes

* * *

Ø That the trial is being held in an Iraqi courtroom bothered some people, including some human-rights groups that I admire. Can he get a fair trial in Iraq, they ask? If he tried — if he is tried there, isn't it a foregone conclusion that he will get the death penalty?

Bob Schieffer, A Fair Trial for Saddam? CBS News, October 23, 2005 available at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/24/opinion/schieffer/main968347.shtml

* * *

Ø Iraq's special tribunal is gearing up to put Saddam Hussein on trial. No charges have been filed, and no trial date has been set. But a debate over whether the former dictator will be treated fairly is already in full swing.

Malini Bawa, Preparations Under Way for Saddam Hussein Trial Amid Controversy, Voice of America, 23 June 2005

* * *

Ø On Wednesday, 22 months after he was dragged from his hiding place in an underground bunker, Saddam Hussein will appear in an Iraqi court to answer for the brutalities he inflicted on his fellow Iraqis. But what should be a moment of triumph for his victims is instead stirring concern about the fairness and competence of the court itself.

John F. Burns, Hussein Goes on Trial Wednesday, and Iraqis See a First Accounting, New York Times, 18 October, 2005

* * *

Ø Human life is always inviolable," the French prelate said. Citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the cardinal-- who is president of the Pontifical Council for Culture-- said that "no one can claim any right over the life and death of another. “The right to life is "a universal principle, and there is no exception," Cardinal Poupard said. "God is master of life and death." The cardinal spoke out as the trial of Saddam Hussein neared its conclusion, with Iraqi prosecutors calling for the death penalty

French cardinal asks clemency for Saddam Hussein, June 24, 2006 available at http://www.cardinalrating.com/cardinal_80__article_4304.htm

* * *

Ø Saddam Hussein again grabbed center stage at his mass murder trial Wednesday with claims that Americans beat and "tortured" him and other defendants while in detention.

Ø A lawyer for Saddam Hussein has accused the former Iraqi dictator's American captors of abusing him, citing a "capture card" that described his condition as "slightly wounded." To support his accusation, Jordanian attorney Mohammad Rashdan -- one of several lawyers representing Saddam -- cited a Red Cross "capture card" dated January 21 that listed Saddam as being in "good health" but "slightly wounded.” Why would he be slightly wounded a month after his arrest?" Rashdan asked. "He's being abused, just like the prisoners of Abu Ghraib were abused."

Pentagon: Saddam not abused, AP, July 24, 2004.

* * *

THE IST FOSTERS SECTARIAN VIOLENCE:

TRANSFER OF THE DETAINEES OVER TO THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT WILL PLUNGE THE COUNTRY TOWARDS IRRECONCILIABLE CIVIL WAR

Ø The UN said Saddam Hussein’s trial would never satisfy international standards because of ongoing violence and flaws in the Iraqi legal system. John Case, the UN’s human rights chief in Iraq, said the murder of two defense lawyers, continued threats against judges and witnesses and weaknesses in the Iraqi justice system had caused grave doubts about the trial’s legitimacy. “We’re very anxious about the tribunal. The legitimacy of the tribunal needs to be examined. It has been seriously challenged in many quarters.”

FreeMarketNews, Saddam’s Trial Unfair, December 5, 2005 available at www.FreeMarketNews.com/WorldNews.asp/nid=2976

* * *

Ø “This was built up as a ‘trial of the century.’ The international community was going to be involved and expectations were high,” says Donna Arzt, a law professor at Syracuse University and a former adviser to a UN war crimes court in Sierra Leone. “Now, there are serious questions about its legitimacy. It’s starting to look like a vendetta.”

Richard Willing & Steven Komarow, Questions Mount as Saddam’s Trial Opens, USA Today, October 18, 2005 available at www.uastoday.com/news/world/2005-10-18-saddam-trial-cover_x.htm/csp=N009

* * *

Ø A coalition of 300 Iraqi tribal leaders on Saturday demanded the release of Saddam Hussein so he could reclaim the presidency and also called for armed resistance against U.S.-led forces. The clan chieftains, most of them Sunni Arabs, included the head of the 1.5 million-member al-Obeidi tribe, said they planned to hold rallies in Sunni cities throughout the country to insist that Hussein be freed and that the charges against him and his co-defendants be dropped. "If the demand is not carried out, we will lead a general, sweeping and popular uprising," said Sheik Wassfy al-Assy, brother of the chief of the Obeidi tribe, which hosted a meeting of the clan leaders on Monday in Ramal, a village 55 miles southwest of Kirkuk. "As for whether [Hussein] will be reinstated in his post as president after his release; that will be up to him." The leaders announced their demands on Saturday, as Shiite-Sunni sectarian violence and a move asserting Kurdish independence heightened fears that the country is sliding toward full-scale civil war.

Ø Arabs across the country expressed anger at a decree by Massoud Barzani, president of the regional government in Kurdish-populated northern Iraq, forbidding the Iraqi flag to be raised in government buildings across the north. The government in the western part of the Kurdish region has always flown only the Kurdish flag -- red, white and green stripes emblazoned with a yellow sun -- but Barzani's order, published in newspapers this week, extends that policy to the eastern part of the region, which previously displayed both the Iraqi and Kurdish flags.” The symptoms of division and separatism and the declaration of a Kurdish state have become apparent in the workings of the Kurdistan government," said Mustafa Tamawi, an Arab leader and human rights activist in Kirkuk. Many Arabs fear that the Kurdish north, which has been largely autonomous since 1991, will secede from the rest of the country.

Amit R. Paley and Saad Sarhan, A Demand for Hussein’s Release, WA Post, Sept. 2, 2006, available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/02/AR2006090201032_pf.html

* * *

Ø M. Cheri Bassiouni, who teaches international law at DePaul University, says that allowing an all-Iraqi court to apply international war crimes law creates a legal “hodgepodge.” Conducting the trial before Iraq elects a permanent legislature in December also risks making the process seem an “American creation” that is “not legitimate”, says Bassiouni, who advised US and Iraqi officials when they were drawing up plans for a special court in 2003.

Richard Willing & Steven Komarow, Questions Mount as Saddam’s Trial Opens, USA Today, October 18, 2005 available at www.uastoday.com/news/world/2005-10-18-saddam-trial-cover_x.htm/csp=N009

* * *

Ø Abd al-Wahab al-Mumayaz, a London-based Iraqi businessman, told Aljazeera.net that Saddam’s execution may do more harm than good for Iraqis. "I can say I am a victim of Saddam Hussein's era, but his execution will leave a deep scar in the body of Iraqi national unity.”The man still enjoys popularity among [a] considerable part of Iraqis who see him a national symbol. If he is executed, they will hold their Shi’a countrymen responsible for wiping out a national symbol. A dilemma will end in a civil war," al-Mumayaz said.

Ahmed Janabi, Saddam's trial divides Iraqi opinion, Al-Jazeera, July 15, 2004 available at http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/BDE07C95-F791-49C3-A087-4569B9C68697.htm

* * *

Ø There are serious risks to bringing Hussein to justice at a time when Iraq is trying to deal with a raging insurgency. Some Iraqis warn that a trial - especially if perceived not to meet international standards - could further inflame sectarian tensions between the Shia-dominated government and the Sunni minority which formed the core of Hussein's regime and now is driving the insurgency. The trial also comes just four days after a divisive referendum on Iraq's new constitution, which has been marred by charges of fraud from Sunni leaders. The Sunnis largely opposed the charter.
"It is not the right time to begin a court case against Saddam," said Sheik Fatih Kashif Ghitta, a prominent Shia cleric in Baghdad. "The security situation is still deteriorating and we still have dangerous sectarian divisions over the constitution."

Mohammad Bazzi, Iraqi officials see obscure killings in Shia village as best chance for conviction and death sentence, October 18, 2005, available at http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-wosadd184474324oct18,0,2046814,print.story?coll=ny-worldnews-toputility

* * *

Ø Many Iraqis gathered round their television sets to watch the proceedings, but by no means was everyone enthused. The headline in Saudi Arabia's Arabic language-daily al-Watan told of indifference: "Saddam's Trial: No-one cares," it read. "The curtains have opened, the cast is ready but the audience is busy with other issues... Even if we concede that the majority of Iraqis hate Saddam, they also hate how things have developed."

Gethin Chamberlain, Arab world is split over the trial of Saddam, The Scotsman, October 20, 2005 available at http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2115142005

* * *

Ø Another complicating point about the trial of Saddam is the illegal, US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, casting the legitimacy of the whole legal order in the present, still-occupied Iraq, under scrutiny, at least from the point of view of international law.
Said otherwise, the trial, and the whole court, has a legitimacy deficit that can only benefit the Iraqi insurgents and pro-Saddam diehards. Justice cannot be properly served in a legally questionable forum and, no doubt, this has the potential of turning around and haunting the occupying forces down the road.

Kaveh L Afrasiabi, The missing charge at Saddam's trial, Asia Times, October 22, 2005 available at http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GJ22Ak02.html

* * *

Ø Fear of civil war stayed the hand of the first President George Bush, when he turned back U.S. troops and left Saddam Hussein in power. It generated much of the opposition to the current President Bush's invasion in 2003. Yet many critics of the invasion, including this page, believed that the dangers from civil war were so dire that U.S. troops, once in, were obliged to remain as long as there was a conceivable route to a just peace. The desperately dangerous situation that now prevails in Iraq could never have been created by Sunni terrorists alone, or by the dithering ambivalence of Sunni political leaders, who seem unable to decide from one day to the next whether they are ready to engage in the give-and-take of parliamentary politics. Much of the blame must also go to ambitious and revenge-minded Shiite political leaders, who, for the past year, have thwarted constitutional compromises and given members of their party’s militia key posts in the government security forces and Interior Ministry prisons. To this day, they continue to resist the formation of a broadly inclusive national unity government.

Iraq on the Brink of Civil War, New York Times, March 2, 2006 available at http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/03/01/opinion/ediraq.php

* * *

Ø UN secretary-general Kofi Annan on Monday called for urgent action to bring Iraq back from the brink of all-out civil war. Mr. Annan told a special meeting on the strife-torn nation at UN headquarters, attended by Iraq's President Jalal Talabani and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the country and its leaders are now at "a crossroads". Mr. Annan said it was "heartbreaking" that "the everyday life of Iraqi people is dominated by the constant threat of sectarian violence and civil strife". Mr. Annan said that Iraq had made "important progress" in the past two years with two national elections, a constitutional referendum and a constitutional process. He said that if Iraqi leaders "can address the needs and common interests of all Iraqis, the promise of peace and prosperity is still within reach"." But if current patterns of alienation and violence persist much longer, there is a grave danger that the Iraqi state will break down, possibly in the midst of full-scale civil war," he said. Mr. Annan said action must be taken in Baghdad and internationally to "bring Iraq back from the brink".

Annan warns Iraq 'on brink' of civil war, AFP, Sept. 19th, 2006, available at http://abc.net.au/cgi-bin/common/printfriendly.pl?http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200609/s1743976.htm

* * *

Ø About six in 10 Iraqis say they approve of attacks on U.S.-led forces, and slightly more than that want their government to ask U.S. troops to leave within a year, according to a poll in that country

Barry Schweid, Poll: Iraqis Back Attacks on U.S. Troops, AP, September 28, 2006, available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/28/AR2006092800408_pf.html

* * *

Ø Iraq has hanged 13 insurgents in the first government executions since the ouster of Saddam Hussein in 2003. Authorities gave few details about the men.

Iraq Executes 13 Insurgents, Florida Statesman, March 9^th, 2006, available at http://story.floridastatesman.com/index.php//ct/9/cid/c08dd24cec417021/id/fb611848e9ef5ec4/

* * *

Ø Iraq's Central Criminal Court said Thursday it had convicted 22 suspected insurgents on a range of crimes, including weapons violations and illegally entering the country. The defendants were convicted in proceedings from Sept. 8 to Sept. 4 and sentences ranged from 1 year in prison to 15 years. Those convicted of entering the country illegally and passport violations included men from Syria, Yemen, France and Muhammed Ahmad Salah, a Lebanese man the court said admitted coming to Iraq to fight coalition forces. An Iraqi man, Abdul-Elwareth Al-Said Abdul-Elwareth Al-Maghrabi, was sentenced to 10 years on illegal weapons violations.

AP, Iraq court convicts 22 suspected insurgents, September 28, 2006, available at http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/9/28/apworld/20060928151037&sec=apworld

* * *